Re: [GENERAL] pg_upgrade ?deficiency

On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:39:18AM -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:

> Well, then we are actually using two different reasons for patching
> pg_dumpall and not pg_dump. Your reason is based on the probability of
> failure, while Tom/Kevin's reason is that default_transaction_read_only
> might be used to block changes to a specific database, and they want a
> pg_dump restore prevented, but a pg_dumpall restore to succeed.

I can't really argue one way or another because *I* am
not likely to be able to offer an actual patch. At any
rate all I am interested in is that pg_upgrade does not
fail to upgrade in surprising ways.

Regarding restoring a pg_dump IMO the line would need to
be drawn along the -c/--clean option because using such seems
to clearly say that, yes, the user *wants* data to be deleted.

If -C/--create is used it shouldn't matter ...

However, I'm not saying that this is how it is to
be done. I am well aware that drawing such subtle
distinctions is walking quite a fine line.

Karsten
--
GPG key ID E4071346 @ gpg-keyserver.de
E167 67FD A291 2BEA 73BD 4537 78B9 A9F9 E407 1346